I purchased a canon 85 L mk11 a few days ago since I found a really good deal and was considering purchasing this to replace my sigma 85 1.4. Sigma has a lot of good qualities but I hate hate hate the unreliable focus confirmation. Areas that I find the lens very similar are contrast and sharpness which are both very good. Listed below are cons for each lens compared to the other on my copies, maybe different for other people.

Cons for Sigma
• Terrible focus confirmation. I have had the lens adjusted and requires 0 micro adjust but is still hit and miss. Worst scenario for focus is back lit and low light (even with speedlite focus assist).
• Yellow warm cast to images. Not a big fix in lightroom.
• Not F1.2. I could care less about 1/3 of a stop but if I leave it out I am sure some people will chime in .

Cons for Canon
• Price
• Rear element easily damaged while installing lens
• Focus by wire and not full time manual focus.
• Protruding front element while focusing and has to be set back in before storing. (not a must but I am more comfortable with the lens barrel set in.)
• Slow focus.
• Further minimum focus distance allowing for less magnification.
• Bokeh a little harsher.

Now I am left with the dilemma of which one to sell. I am leaning towards selling the sigma, even though it has less cons than the Canon. At the end of the day when shooting for money your shots have to be in focus. Is it worth it to risk a once in a lifetime moment at a wedding to save a thousand bucks?

Sorry no pictures of a cat or dog . Let me know your thoughts and if you want any sample pictures to aid in your decision which one to purchase also.

And I can't imagine anything smoother than the bokeh from the 85L. I'd love to see some side-by-side shots showing that the Sigma is better (equal I can believe, but better)

Damaging the rear element is not really a huge concern, so long as you're careful.

Full time manual defenitely doesn't happen if the camera is in off due to the focus by wire. I know that when I am finished with the lens I have to switch to manual focus to bring it back to infinity, although maybe the camera is asleep, or my lens is not working properly. I will have to look into tonight since it is new to me.

As for the Bokeh, seems that the sigma has a more seemless transition between the aperature blades. I will post some examples tonight when home from work. Definitly there is a difference on my copies, maybe not for all though.

The rear element is a concern for me since minor imperfection on this glass will show on the pictures, where as the front element can have scratches and dust and basically show nothing. I am carefull while changing but not used to this lens, I hope I dont scratch it .

As for resale value, I purchased the sigma used and will probably loose 300 ish when selling, the Canon I got a great deal on and will probably gain 300-400 when selling. I am more concenered with having the proper tool than a few hundred bucks here or there .

canon pants wrote:
Full time manual defenitely doesn't happen if the camera is in off due to the focus by wire. I know that when I am finished with the lens I have to switch to manual focus to bring it back to infinity, although maybe the camera is asleep, or my lens is not working properly. I will have to look into tonight since it is new to me.

That's not what is typically meant by "full-time manual", which usually implies the ability to override the autofocus without switching into MF mode (like one would do with the 50 f/1.8).

canon pants wroteAs for the Bokeh, seems that the sigma has a more seemless transition between the aperature blades. I will post some examples tonight when home from work. Definitly there is a difference on my copies, maybe not for all though.

Again, perhaps there is a difference. But this really would be splitting hairs, since the 85L bokeh is, to my eyes, absolutely stellar.

canon pants wroteThe rear element is a concern for me since minor imperfection on this glass will show on the pictures, where as the front element can have scratches and dust and basically show nothing. I am carefull while changing but not used to this lens, I hope I dont scratch it .

Absolutely. The point is that a little care goes a long way to preventing any damage. This, to me, is not a reason to avoid the 85L.

canon pants wroteAs for resale value, I purchased the sigma used and will probably loose 300 ish when selling, the Canon I got a great deal on and will probably gain 300-400 when selling. I am more concenered with having the proper tool than a few hundred bucks here or there .

Absolutely agree with this. Get the best tool for the job.

To me, the major reason to go with the Sigma seems to be the price/performance ratio; you get nearly the same performance for far less money. The same can be (and is) said of the Sigma 50 vs. Canon 50L, though in this case the AF issues that plague the Sigma 50 make the equation a bit more complicated.

I love my 85L, and I won't be selling it anytime soon, regardless of the quality of the Sigma. The Canon does what I need/want.

My Sigma focus has been reliable and accurate on the 5D II & 40D
The image quality has been good, resistance to flare good
I get sharp results even wide open with careful use of the shallow depth of field
no regrets on the Sigma 85mm F1.4

Chad S wrote:
There appears to be many people on each side of the fence in regards to the Sigma's ability to focus.

That alone tells me it isn't worth buying. You might get lucky and get a good one, but what if you're one of the many who don't....??

I am convinced there are no good sigma 85's focus wise. Iniatially they seem good but in hindsight you have a much better keep rate with the 85L. If you are not looking at hundred percent they are very similar majority of the time. I load hundred percent previews when importing in lightroom and check every image, even with taking multiple pictures to ensure focus I am sometimes left with almost nothing due to the inconsistancy.
I went through 6 copies of the lens before purchasing the current one, three front focused huge, two would bang around and not focus at all, #6 was the winner and did pretty good testing at the camera shop.
I am debating weather or not it is worth the premium to keep the Canon, but yes hands down the Canon is better because all the good qualitys of the Sigma don't mean crap if it is out of focus. To bad becasue the Sigma could be an AMAZING lens to me if it focused more consistant.

Not trying to step on anyones toes, just I gave it a fair chance and really have been disapointed with it. I am trying to talk myself into keeping it becuase of the cost difference but it just isn't working. Anyone want to buy a sigma 85 ?

I've sold my 85LII after trying out the Sigma. But later discovered the AF issues with it. It was front-focusing on objects 10-15 feet and closer and was back-focusing when shooting near infinity. So I decided to send it in for calibration and it works perfectly now. Both AF and IQ are great and there are no more issues with it. I think bokeh is very similar but i would give slight edge to 85L. They are both very sharp wide open and IMO Sigma handles fringing better. I don't have any problems using it in low light situations and it performs perfectly (using center point on 5DII and I don't recompose with fast lenses). AF is spot on. No more OOF shots than I used to have with 85L.

With that being said I still regret selling 85L. Not even sure why. Maybe because of all the issues I've had with Sigma.

I don't understand though how you would lose $300 with the Sigma if you said that you bought it used. I know good used copies sell for about $700-750 which is about $150-200 less than the cost of a new lens.

deepbluejh wrote:
When the Sigma gets focus right, it's great. That said, I found the 85L marginally sharper overall with MUCH more reliable focus.

IMO, you get what you pay for here with the Sigma, which isn't all THAT bad, but it's not the screaming bargain folks originally thought it would be.

I'd have to disagree with you about sharpness and overall assessment. I think that Sigma is slightly sharper wide open than 85L at f/1.4 and up until f/2.8. Looks like TDP comparison seems to support my findings (here). But how can it not present a value compare to a $2000 lens? Sure, if its not operating properly it's as good as garbage but otherwise it's a superb lens which does present great value compare to 85L.

OP, since you've had your 85L such a short time you should do some side-by-side real world testing to make sure its not your technique or body that is causing the focus inconsistencies (and not the Sigma).